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
Saturday, October 4, 2008
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.
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.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Talking Points #2- "Aria"
Richard Rodriguez
Argument:
Rodriguez argues that his native language is a private language and that learning English gives students a public identity, however as a result of assimilating the native language becomes less private and in many cases obsolete.
Quotes:
1. Because I wrongly imagined that English was intrinsically a public language and Spanish an intrinsically private one, I easily noted the difference between classroom language and the language of home.
It seems that Rodriguez has determined that in public or the "classroom" in order to be a part of this setting he needed to learn English while at home he could be comfortable enough to use his native language, in a private setting. I always thought that students should embrace their native language while adding English in order to succeed in the classroom. In the academic world teachers seem to be supporting the bilingual system as well, meaning that you teach the students English using the students home language so the student does not form a disconnect with their language, thus their identity.
2. "With great tact the visitors continued, 'Is it possible for you and your husband to encourage your children to practice their English when they are home?' Of course, my parents complied. What would they not do for their children's well-being?
At this point it seems that Rodriguez's family has been asked to lose their identity and assimilate to the "valued" ideology of the United States. It is as if the nuns are saying that their language is not valued in society so they need to help their children learn English. Like Delpit explains about the "culture of power" the nuns are telling Rodriguez's parents that in order for their children to succeed these are the "tools" they need.
3. But the bilingualists simplistically scorn the value and necessity of assimilation. They do not seem to realize that there are two ways a person is individualized. So they do not realize that while one suffers a diminished sense of private individuality by becoming assimilated into public society, such assimilation makes possible the achievement of public individuality.
I believe that Rodriguez is saying that while it is important for bilingual American students to find their identity in a public forum by learning English they lose their private identity because they become more comfortable with English and form a disconnect with their native language speaking parents. So assimilation does not come without a cost.
Questions/Comments/Points to Share:
I found this article particularly interesting and easy to read because of the narrative style. I think that Rodriguez brings up an important point. I have learned from most educators that it is important for ESL teachers to teach students English but to embrace their native language as well so they do not lose their identity. Rodriguez seems to argue that as an English language learner it was important for him to obtain his public identity with the language but it cost him his private identity at home. I have heard that most second generation immigrants to this country usually only speak their native language at home if at all making them more comfortable with English and as a result the language is lost by the third generation. This is why I think that it remains important that teachers embrace students native language while teaching them the tools to succeed in public with English. It should not overshadow but complement their language learning. It seems that Collier agrees with Rodgriguez and cautions against assimilating students at a cost to their native language "Don't teach a second language in any way that challenges or seeks to eliminate the first language." I think this is why it is important to have a balanced ESL program.
Argument:
Rodriguez argues that his native language is a private language and that learning English gives students a public identity, however as a result of assimilating the native language becomes less private and in many cases obsolete.
Quotes:
1. Because I wrongly imagined that English was intrinsically a public language and Spanish an intrinsically private one, I easily noted the difference between classroom language and the language of home.
It seems that Rodriguez has determined that in public or the "classroom" in order to be a part of this setting he needed to learn English while at home he could be comfortable enough to use his native language, in a private setting. I always thought that students should embrace their native language while adding English in order to succeed in the classroom. In the academic world teachers seem to be supporting the bilingual system as well, meaning that you teach the students English using the students home language so the student does not form a disconnect with their language, thus their identity.
2. "With great tact the visitors continued, 'Is it possible for you and your husband to encourage your children to practice their English when they are home?' Of course, my parents complied. What would they not do for their children's well-being?
At this point it seems that Rodriguez's family has been asked to lose their identity and assimilate to the "valued" ideology of the United States. It is as if the nuns are saying that their language is not valued in society so they need to help their children learn English. Like Delpit explains about the "culture of power" the nuns are telling Rodriguez's parents that in order for their children to succeed these are the "tools" they need.
3. But the bilingualists simplistically scorn the value and necessity of assimilation. They do not seem to realize that there are two ways a person is individualized. So they do not realize that while one suffers a diminished sense of private individuality by becoming assimilated into public society, such assimilation makes possible the achievement of public individuality.
I believe that Rodriguez is saying that while it is important for bilingual American students to find their identity in a public forum by learning English they lose their private identity because they become more comfortable with English and form a disconnect with their native language speaking parents. So assimilation does not come without a cost.
Questions/Comments/Points to Share:
I found this article particularly interesting and easy to read because of the narrative style. I think that Rodriguez brings up an important point. I have learned from most educators that it is important for ESL teachers to teach students English but to embrace their native language as well so they do not lose their identity. Rodriguez seems to argue that as an English language learner it was important for him to obtain his public identity with the language but it cost him his private identity at home. I have heard that most second generation immigrants to this country usually only speak their native language at home if at all making them more comfortable with English and as a result the language is lost by the third generation. This is why I think that it remains important that teachers embrace students native language while teaching them the tools to succeed in public with English. It should not overshadow but complement their language learning. It seems that Collier agrees with Rodgriguez and cautions against assimilating students at a cost to their native language "Don't teach a second language in any way that challenges or seeks to eliminate the first language." I think this is why it is important to have a balanced ESL program.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Talking Points #1:"Data show racial bias persists in America"
Salim Muwakkil
Muwakkil argues that even though we may have made some strides against racism in today's society it still exists and continues to remain a major problem for minority groups.
Quotes:
1) "racial disparities persist, and many analysts trace them to biased cultural attitudes and prejudiced social policies so deeply woven into the fabric of American life that they are virtually invisible."
I think that Muwakkil is essentially saying the same thing as McIntosh which is that "racism" or the ideologies which promote this attitudes are such a strong part of our culture that we do not even recognize it. It is just like the "invisible knapsack" of privileges that white people benefit from everyday.
2) "applicants with white-sounding names were 50 percent more likely to get called for an initial interview than applicants with black-sounding ones. What's more, higher-quality resumes provided little advantage for black applicants."
I just think this is a shocking piece of evidence. It is disconcerting to think that racism is still such a strong part of the job market today that no matter how qualified a black person is for the job a white person still has the advantage just because of the color of their skin.
3) "blacks constitute about 13 percent of America's drug users, but make up 58 percent of those sent to prison for drug possession, according to the Sentencing Project, a think tank."
This just goes to show how racial profiling among the police is still a major problem today. It still continues to be a problem among police officers in Providence according to the news.
Questions/Comments/Point to Share:
I always thought that racism is not as big a problem today as it was in the 50s-60s. After reading this article I realize that it is so embedded in our society that it is a major problem for minority groups. Some of these statistics are shocking but after reading these statistics I recognized that these problems are still readily discussed in mainstream media such as the problem with racial profiling. Muwakkil really backs up the arguments set up by Johnson, Delpit, and McIntosh which is that society instills privileges to white, middle-class people while other racial groups are kept outside the circle or outside the "culture of power" as Delpit would say. It is so embedded in American culture that people with privilege do not even recognize it yet it still exists. This makes change extremely difficult. This is why society keeps privileged groups in the dark so that this "culture of power" continues to exist.
Comment: I think as future teachers we need to make a conscious effort to be aware of these privileges and help those without privilege succeed in a still racist society. The future starts with our children and as teachers we have more of an impact than anyone else.
Muwakkil argues that even though we may have made some strides against racism in today's society it still exists and continues to remain a major problem for minority groups.
Quotes:
1) "racial disparities persist, and many analysts trace them to biased cultural attitudes and prejudiced social policies so deeply woven into the fabric of American life that they are virtually invisible."
I think that Muwakkil is essentially saying the same thing as McIntosh which is that "racism" or the ideologies which promote this attitudes are such a strong part of our culture that we do not even recognize it. It is just like the "invisible knapsack" of privileges that white people benefit from everyday.
2) "applicants with white-sounding names were 50 percent more likely to get called for an initial interview than applicants with black-sounding ones. What's more, higher-quality resumes provided little advantage for black applicants."
I just think this is a shocking piece of evidence. It is disconcerting to think that racism is still such a strong part of the job market today that no matter how qualified a black person is for the job a white person still has the advantage just because of the color of their skin.
3) "blacks constitute about 13 percent of America's drug users, but make up 58 percent of those sent to prison for drug possession, according to the Sentencing Project, a think tank."
This just goes to show how racial profiling among the police is still a major problem today. It still continues to be a problem among police officers in Providence according to the news.
Questions/Comments/Point to Share:
I always thought that racism is not as big a problem today as it was in the 50s-60s. After reading this article I realize that it is so embedded in our society that it is a major problem for minority groups. Some of these statistics are shocking but after reading these statistics I recognized that these problems are still readily discussed in mainstream media such as the problem with racial profiling. Muwakkil really backs up the arguments set up by Johnson, Delpit, and McIntosh which is that society instills privileges to white, middle-class people while other racial groups are kept outside the circle or outside the "culture of power" as Delpit would say. It is so embedded in American culture that people with privilege do not even recognize it yet it still exists. This makes change extremely difficult. This is why society keeps privileged groups in the dark so that this "culture of power" continues to exist.
Comment: I think as future teachers we need to make a conscious effort to be aware of these privileges and help those without privilege succeed in a still racist society. The future starts with our children and as teachers we have more of an impact than anyone else.
Talking Points #1:"White Privilige: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack"
Peggy McIntosh
McIntosh argues that white people have privileges even though they may not realize it exists and this privilege gives them dominance over those without privilege.
Quotes:
1) "I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was "meant" to remain oblivious."
I think McIntosh is basically saying that being white today's society entitles privileges that were not earned but white people benefit from on a daily basis such as being able to walk on the streets without being harassed by the police, going shopping in a store without being followed, driving your car in a nice neighborhood without being pulled over etc. Society teaches us that these privileges do not exist or "hides" this from us so that we continue to benefit while others are oppressed.
2) "In proportion as my racial group was being made confident comfortable, and oblivious, other groups were likely being made unconfident, uncomfortable, and alienated."
In this quote McIntosh says that the other racial groups are meant to feel inferior and segregated as a result of the privileged of her racial group, while white people are meant to feel comfortable with their privilege. Society creates this hidden privilege while those who are privileged continue to benefit while other racial groups are not able to participate in society as much. It is like the age old class system from the middle ages which gives power to those with privilege and intern alienates those without privilege. If you are born white then you have privileges that no one else will have because they are not white.
3) "it is an open question whether we will choose to use unearned advantages to weaken hidden systems of advantage, and whether we will use any of our arbitrarily awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base."
I am confused as to what McIntosh is suggesting here. Is it that she feels we should use our privilege to advocate for those without privilege and shift the way society gives power? Is it that we should weaken the system of power with these unearned privileges? Is it that McIntosh is saying that essentially with this unearned awarded power we need to begin to shift the discourse of society and break down this system of power? I'm not quite sure what she is getting at here.
Questions/Comments/Point to Share:
I think that McIntosh brings up some great points about privilege that I never thought of before. I realize that I have "unearned" privileges that I "cash in" on daily which others are not awarded simply because of the color of their skin. When she made the extensive list of privileges which she uses on a daily basis I was surprised at the amount of privileges that I also take for granted each day. This proves how I have been taught to be oblivious. As a white person I just thought these things happened to everybody regardless of skin color or ethnicity. That is why I continue to reap the benefits of my race while others still struggle for "equality."
There are some very clear connections between McIntosh and Lisa Delpit in this text. Just as Delpit explained as the fifth aspect of the culture of power "Those who have power are least likely to recognize...while those without power are most likely to recognize." McIntosh is essentially arguing the same thing. With this "invisible knapsack" of privileges we are meant to remain oblivious while other racial groups are "uncomfortable, unconfident, and alienated." McIntosh also overlaps with Johnson in her argument about society teaching us to remain oblivious. It is the way society perceives us which we get our privilege.
Question: If we are aware of our privilege rather than oblivious as McIntosh says, can we make a conscious effort to help others benefit or is it impossible because of the structure of our society?
McIntosh argues that white people have privileges even though they may not realize it exists and this privilege gives them dominance over those without privilege.
Quotes:
1) "I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was "meant" to remain oblivious."
I think McIntosh is basically saying that being white today's society entitles privileges that were not earned but white people benefit from on a daily basis such as being able to walk on the streets without being harassed by the police, going shopping in a store without being followed, driving your car in a nice neighborhood without being pulled over etc. Society teaches us that these privileges do not exist or "hides" this from us so that we continue to benefit while others are oppressed.
2) "In proportion as my racial group was being made confident comfortable, and oblivious, other groups were likely being made unconfident, uncomfortable, and alienated."
In this quote McIntosh says that the other racial groups are meant to feel inferior and segregated as a result of the privileged of her racial group, while white people are meant to feel comfortable with their privilege. Society creates this hidden privilege while those who are privileged continue to benefit while other racial groups are not able to participate in society as much. It is like the age old class system from the middle ages which gives power to those with privilege and intern alienates those without privilege. If you are born white then you have privileges that no one else will have because they are not white.
3) "it is an open question whether we will choose to use unearned advantages to weaken hidden systems of advantage, and whether we will use any of our arbitrarily awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base."
I am confused as to what McIntosh is suggesting here. Is it that she feels we should use our privilege to advocate for those without privilege and shift the way society gives power? Is it that we should weaken the system of power with these unearned privileges? Is it that McIntosh is saying that essentially with this unearned awarded power we need to begin to shift the discourse of society and break down this system of power? I'm not quite sure what she is getting at here.
Questions/Comments/Point to Share:
I think that McIntosh brings up some great points about privilege that I never thought of before. I realize that I have "unearned" privileges that I "cash in" on daily which others are not awarded simply because of the color of their skin. When she made the extensive list of privileges which she uses on a daily basis I was surprised at the amount of privileges that I also take for granted each day. This proves how I have been taught to be oblivious. As a white person I just thought these things happened to everybody regardless of skin color or ethnicity. That is why I continue to reap the benefits of my race while others still struggle for "equality."
There are some very clear connections between McIntosh and Lisa Delpit in this text. Just as Delpit explained as the fifth aspect of the culture of power "Those who have power are least likely to recognize...while those without power are most likely to recognize." McIntosh is essentially arguing the same thing. With this "invisible knapsack" of privileges we are meant to remain oblivious while other racial groups are "uncomfortable, unconfident, and alienated." McIntosh also overlaps with Johnson in her argument about society teaching us to remain oblivious. It is the way society perceives us which we get our privilege.
Question: If we are aware of our privilege rather than oblivious as McIntosh says, can we make a conscious effort to help others benefit or is it impossible because of the structure of our society?
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Hey!
Hey I'm Chris. I've lived in Rhode Island my whole life. I'm in my seventh year here at RIC (long story) and I am an ELED/SPED major. I will hopefully be student teaching in the spring as long as I finish my last 4 classes. I work for the East Providence Recreation department and at Blockbuster Video. I love movies and all kinds of music. I saw John Mayor twice this summer (awesome guitarist) if you haven't seen him live you absolutely should. I also like to read, I am currently reading The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini, good so far. I also love to travel, going to Greece 2010, can't wait! I also Like sports my favorite teams are Detroit Lions, Boston Redsox and Celtics, World Champs baby!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
