Kliewer: Reconceptualizing Down Syndrome (Reflections)

There were a few points made in Kliewer's essay, aside from the incredibly touching stories, that stood out to me. He explains the difference between a model of utilitarian individualism and a model of human reciprocity. In a model of utilitarian individualism, individuals stand alone in constant competition and scrutiny of each other. Anyone considered apparently inadequate is marginalized, devalued, and stripped of having a voice in the wider community. This often includes people with disabilities, such as people with Down Syndrome - which the essay focuses on. In a model of human reciprocity however, the focus is not on individuals, but on the community. In this model, everyone is valued for the unique and varied ways they enrich the experience of the whole community; everyone is included and everyone has a voice. Kliewer argues for this model and presents stories as evidence for how well it benefits not just less abled individuals, but well abled ones also. 

He argues that schools are the most important sites for this model, to develop a knowledge and a sense of community in which they understand that everyone has something valuable to offer the group, or society as a whole. This will also lead to a more socially just society. An important part of this model also has to do with the need to have a deeper, broader understanding of intellect. In one of his examples, Kliewer points out how a 7-year old boy with Downs is tested to be considered at a 2-year old level, yet his teacher and his peers recognize that he's at the same intellectual level they're at. The model of human reciprocity appreciates the reality that intelligence and understanding can be demonstrated in different ways, ways that are outside the box of the standardized testing ideology.

One statement I really liked was this: "Acknowledging students with [disabilities] as thoughtful, creative, and interested learners with personal identities that distinguish them from all other people suggests an individual value that enhances any context containing the child."

This reminded me of the little boy, in the video we watched about inclusion classes, who said that having a disabled individual in the class was good for everyone because it offers them exposure and understanding that prevents them from reacting negatively to involvement with such individuals. Kliewer and many other professionals who advocate for inclusion further believe that learning is augmented for all students in an inclusive classroom. 

Here is a video I found that makes a lot of the same points as Kliewer in his article

and this one I just thought was cool because it used stop animation, and analogies like the one about wearing glasses we use a lot in FNED

Disney Femslash - thought this was so cool!!!

I was looking for a picture of Belle to use as my fb default - people are doing it to raise awareness for child abuse. Anyway, I stumbled when I started seeing pictures like these:

I got pretty excited because I thought this was so cool, and I was curious so I clicked on one of the pictures and it brought me to this link, which had a ton of these pictures and fanmade videos. Apparently this is part of a whole sub-culture of fan-made LGBTQ art. Here are some of my favorites of the fanmade videos - some just coupled two female characters, the best ones told stories:









and here's one for the fellas:



I think it's so interesting to see these same sex pairings. I wonder when Disney will get the hint and come out with a real LGBTQ movie! Finding this obviously made me think about a lot of the theory we've covered this semester: Johnson - we can't be quiet about these issues, Carlson - issues of LGBTQ invisibility, and Christensen - the secret education. Go "slashers" for fighting back in such a neat, creative way!

If, like Christensen suggests, more of us were exposed to images like this at a young age, issues brought up by Carlson about LGBTQ students suffering harassment at the hands of prejudiced students would rarely ever come up. Maybe society would finally understand that love is beautiful in all forms. Seeing is believing.

Thanksgiving Nightmare!!!

So, I was thinking about the video Dr. Bogad posted for Columbus day, and decided to look for some like that about Thanksgiving. Here are two that I found particularly informative and emotional:





The next day I had Thanksgiving with my family, with this in mind. My family had placed on the table, along with our food, fake "Indian" hats and were encouraging the youngest to put them on. My Uncle put one on to humor us, and made savage, stereotyped "Indian" sounds. I was disgusted. They asked my niece if she was learning about the pilgrims and the "Indians" at school. I was so tempted to say something about the lie she'd have learned, but I was afraid to say anything without my family thinking I was preaching, being a freak, and ruining Thanksgiving. As if this wasn't enough to ruin my appetite - my niece came out after dinner wearing a tiara, saying she was a princess - to which everyone complimented how pretty she was! AAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!

I would love to learn how to educate my family on these issues without coming across as a pompous windbag. Any suggestions?

Better Late Than Never Reflections on Christensen

In "Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us," Linda Christensen states that our children, our students, receive a "secret education" from what they read in childrens' books and watch on TV and in movies. That secret education teaches them "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.

Christensen urges us to "look at the roles of women, men, people of color, and poor people," and encourage us ask the following questions:

• Who plays the lead?
• Who plays the buffoon? 
• Who plays the servant? 
• Look at the race, station in life, body type of each character. 
• What motivates the character? 
• What do they want out of life? 
• What's their mission? 
• If there are people of color in the cartoon, what do they look like? 
• How are they portrayed? 
• What could children learn about this particular group from this cartoon? 
• How does the film portray overweight people? 
• What about women other than the main character? 
• What jobs do you see them doing? 
• What do they talk about? 
• What are their main concerns? 
• What would young children learn about women's roles in society if they watched this film and believed it? 
• What roles do money, possessions, and power play in the film?
• Who has it?
• Who wants it?
• How important is it in the story?
• What would children learn about what's important in this society?

She offers her students a chart to fill out as a guide when analyzing these media messages. Often we find that the lead characters are often the most attractive, the heroine is mostly concerned with winning a man, this becomes her happily ever after, the hero is hyper masculine, she is the damsel in distress and he becomes the knight in shining armor, poor people are uneducated and illiterate, people of color are horribly stereotyped, overweight people are buffoons, ugly people are evil or comical - need I go on? 

These are the messages being taught to our children, which can lead to a whole heap of insecurities for many, among other things.

Christensen offers us, as teachers, a way to help our students fight back by first, using her model to have them analyze different media, and secondly - taking action!

Instead of just assigning students an essay critiquing a book, show, or movie, Christensen has her students come up with a project that will go beyond the classroom, empowering students to educate others about what they've learned. While it must still be specific, and use specific examples - the students have the opportunity to publish their work for an audience of their choosing: "parents, peers, teachers, children's book authors, librarians, Disney video store owners, advertisers." One group of students decided to make a pamphlet that graded different cartoon shows that they would hand out at the PTA meetings. Here is another example which explores the roles of women and demands a new kind of self-sufficient heroine, and one examining the gender roles taught and their affects on the lives of the viewers. 

 Reading this article, as an individual, has caused me to examine and re-examine everything I read and watch to look for the social injustices they might be teaching, I think about having my own children. I've decided not to shelter them from it, but teach them about what they're watching. As a teacher, I hope to do the same for my students, and incorporate an underlying theme of social injustice in the media message into my curriculum, so that as a class we are continuously analyzing what we read and what we see, and I hope to give them the kind of assignments recommended by Christensen.

I hope that, in class, we can talk more about specific ways to incorporate this kind of critical analysis into our own classrooms someday. Because it's easy to look at and discuss these issues in a class designed around them, but we need to know how to teach our students about these issues in different classroom settings.

***Thoughts on Learning and Mixed Media***

In the animated speech we watched today in class, there was a spot that talked about how kids have all these learning resources like the internet, and TV, movies, etc. but they are penalized in class for being distracted from "boring stuff." I've also noticed that, on my blog, I mostly only get comments on posts where I include a video clip. I think there's a lot to be said for this, and about the importance of using mixed media to teach in the classroom. I know I feel I learn a lot more from watching clips and movies than from just reading, writing, and talking about the articles. It holds my interest more, and I internalize it more.

So, in light of this, here's a clip about a teacher using facebook as a learning tool!



Share some thoughts, links, or clips of your own!

Promising Practices

I arrived at the conference on time and well dressed. Checking in was easy and I quickly found a table and some familiar faces. I was disappointed by the "breakfast" we were offered which consisted of one kind of chewy granola bar and mini bottled waters. Tea and coffee were also available. Jackie and I ended up buying breakfast in the cafeteria. My classmates and I gave out subdued cheers as Dr. Bogad gave a welcome speech. Then we were sent off to our first seminars.

My first seminar was A.L.L.I.E.D. which was slow to start but ultimately picked up. The panel was concerned with making classrooms safe for students in underrepresented groups such as blacks, Latinos, Asians, and LGBTQ. Everyone was at one point asked to stand in a circle around the room, and given an index card to read aloud. Written on them were true, anonymous stories of classroom experiences individuals had had which showcased the difficulties of being excluded, singled out, and misunderstood. After this activity, we were broken up into groups of four. As we discussed the stories that stood out to us and our emotional reactions, we also brainstormed some prevention strategies. The seminar was concluded  by sharing these suggestions together as a whole, and they were made into a comprehensive list:

~ Don't single anyone out to represent an entire group
~ Don't assume a student is an expert on their culture
~ Don't assume a student needs "fixing"
~ If you're unsure about how to address a student in class, ask them directly in a private setting
~ Use media to expose the entire class to related issues and encourage them to question media messages
~ Challenge your fear . . . say something
~ Include content of underrepresented groups in the curriculum
~ Have class discussions about related issues; break the silence
~ Let students be the experts on their own lives
~ Students need to see themselves in the classroom (figuratively and literally i.e. pictures and posters)

I felt this was a great way to wrap up; it provides clear, explicit solutions in a simple format as a take-away for educators. Implementation is ultimately what matters as a take-away, and I know I can easily implement these tips in a classroom.

During this session I thought of Delpit because of the obvious examples of the culture of power in the individuals' stories, and the explicitness of our take-away list. I'm thinking now, also, of Oakes because of the success of our cooperative group tasks. I decided to find some posters that would satisfy the last tip on the list:

Next was lunch: an improvement compared to breakfast, and some time to view the vendors' wares. I was disappointed at the huge lack of material and information relevant to secondary education. Still I left with a fair stack of free goods.

The second seminar I attended was titled Caring In School: Problem-Solving Issues of Equity. I was expecting to get a clear set of suggestions for creating an equitable class community but was sorely disappointed in that respect. The speaker rambled about her research, and gave us the simple task of answering the question: "What does 'care' in education mean to you?" She briefly mentioned the different approaches that women and men have to teaching but never followed up on it or gave it any kind of conclusion. Finally, the only tips she provided were on how to analyze student narratives by asking the following questions:

~ What was the conflict about?
~ How was the conflict resolved?
~ What does this story reveal about what was important to the student?

After that, she didn't provide any clue of what to do with that information, or how to resolve any kind of issue for an individual student, or class. The What? and So What? were confused, and the Now What? was non-existant.

I enjoyed the President's speech. I thought her stories were entertaining and I liked her message: to ignore formalities and be inquisitive of people who are different. I thought it related well to the Johnson article we read at the start of the semester.

In spite of a few shortcomings in, the keynote speaker, Dennis Shirley's speech, I got quite a few valuable take-aways. For example, the 5 Dimensions of Multicultural Education are:

1. content integration
2. knowledge construction process
3. prejudice reduction
4. an equity pedagogy
5. an empowering school culture

I appreciated his warnings of the common struggles teachers face, relating to what he calls "The Unholy Trinity," which consists of Presentism - trying to survive the present and losing sight of a vision for the future, Privatism - feeling isolated with no support system, and Conservatism - accepting administrative designs and neglecting to develop a unique curriculum designed around the students' needs.

The ending of his speech was rushed, but he said to at least take away the following two things:

1. you need to know what your vision is
2. you need a supportive network

He also said, "rally for the kids!" Again, although there were a few shortcomings, I consider these tidbits valuable.

Quotes on Oakes

The essay, "Tracking: Why Schools Need to Take Another Route," by Jeannie Oakes really struck a chord with me. As the differences between low-ability and high-ability classrooms, content, and teaching were described, I was reminded of my own experiences as a student.


In low-ability classes, for example, teachers seem to be less encouraging and more punitive, placing more emphasis on discipline and behavior and less on academic learning . . . they seem to be more concerned about getting students to follow directions, be on time, and sit quietly . . . When they're not being disruptive, students in low-ability classes are often apathetic. The reason for this may be that because they're more likely to fail, they risk more by trying.


I am an intelligent person. As an adolescent, I read for pleasure, and had a talent for creative writing. I possessed good reasoning and analytic skills. I was a fast learner. I was diagnosed with ADD as I was often distracted in class. Really I think I was bored. The content wasn't stimulating to me, nor were the teachers. They fit the descriptions in the quote above. I acted out in school, furious with my teachers for various reasons. Once, a certain English teacher accused me of not handing in an assignment I knew I had. This particular teacher's desk was piled high with papers in disorganized stacks. I told her I had handed it to her prior to the due date. She would not admit that she may have lost my paper and refused to even look for it again, still insisting that I had not given it to her. She was rude, as many of my teachers were in Tiverton, so I was rude back. I was often suspended, and labeled as a troubled child. I was kept back in seventh grade and had to go to summer school to pass the eighth grade because I continuously refused to learn from these teachers who didn't respect me, care about me, or believe in me.

In [high-ability classes], critical thinking and problem-solving skills seemed to emerge from the high quality of the course content . . . top-track classes spend more class time on learning activities and less on discipline, socializing, or class routine . . . Their teachers tend to be more enthusiastic , to make instructions clearer, and to use strong criticism or ridicule less frequently than teachers of low-ability classes. Classroom tasks are often better organized, and students are given a greater variety of things to do. 


I moved to Vermont my sophomore year of high school. At U-32, things were different, they were so much better! I fell in love with school. The teachers were excited about the content, they respected the students, cared about them, believed in them. Critical thinking was incorporated and encouraged in the classroom. Silly rules like not being able to wear hats or chew gum, which never really made much sense to me, were abandoned. Teachers were referred to by first name, which I think really created a sense that teachers and students could be on the same level, could relate. My teachers were no longer boring or rude, they were passionate and kind. I rose to be consistently on the honor role, and enjoyed being an active participant in class. I developed positive relationships with many of my teachers. This turn-around I experienced was entirely due to the kind of education I was receiving here, compared to the kind I had received in Tiverton schools.

Unless teachers and administrators believe and expect all students to learn well, they will be unlikely to create school and classroom conditions where students believe in their own ability and exert the effort it takes to succeed. 

Having experienced both sides of the learning spectrum is part of what fuels my passion for becoming an educator. I want to be one less teacher who abuses his/her students by disrespecting and under-estimating them, who causes them to shut down and refuse to learn. I want to be one more teacher who shows his/her students passion and possibility, who makes learning fun and exciting. It was this sentiment, for me, that Oakes spoke to.


In class I would love to hear others share similar stories in which a teacher's positive or negative attitude made a difference for them and how they were able to learn.

Reflections on Gender and Education/Extended Comments - Anne and Beth

I was finally able to commit some time to this blog post. I decided to start by reading my fellow classmate's blogs. When I came across Anne's blog and watched the "Does Gender Matter Video," my first reaction was to reject what Dr. Leonard Sax was saying. Here, I've posted the video on my own blog for convenience:



We had talked in class about gender equity, and how separating boys from girls would teach them that boys and girls are on opposite teams in this world. His suggestions, I thought, are also reinforcing gender stereotypes. However, I thought about his comment on the different ways boys and girls see, and I found it very interesting. Boys' eyes seek movement, and girls' eyes seek color. In an evolutionary way, it makes sense to me. Biology tells us that we were, before the agricultural revolution, hunter/gatherers. The males would hunt game, while the females gathered fruits and berries. If this is true, it would make sense for males' eyes to be hardwired to see movement - they would need to recognize movement to find game. It makes sense for females' eyes to be hardwired to see color - to find fruits and berries.

I came across a second video promoting Sax's theories on Beth's blog which made me question my initial reaction further:



Now I'm confused because, although I find the science and the research of Sax's theories to be believable, it makes me uncomfortable to see such gender stereotypes reinforced in this style of teaching. We can see that the boys are being taught to be active, to compete, to do, and the girls are taught to be passive, to be social, to be. At the same time, I think, perhaps this like the difference between "equal" and "equitable." Maybe it's different, but fair. The test scores are up and the grades are improving! Maybe the boys are getting what they need, and the girls are getting what they need, so maybe it is a good model for teaching . . . ?

David Sadker, mentioned briefly in the video, seems not to think so. I decided to find more information on his standpoint, and why he thinks same-sex schooling is "a cheap solution to a much deeper problem." The problem he is referring to, being gender bias. Here is a lecture given by Sadker, which provides some really interesting facts and statistics, and I think a good argument against same-sex education:







So who's right? Sax or Sadker? I would really like to debate on this in class!!!

Connections on Wise "Between Barack and a Hard Place"

Tim Wise argues that, although we have a black president, we really haven't come all that far as a society in terms of SCWAAMP, particularly the W part. We can see this, and how his argument relates to the Brown v. Board of Education case in the following video:




When we see here, that the study done by Dr. Clark at the time of Brown v. Board of Ed has the same results today, we see how little our society has advanced to diminish race-bias. In a major-ally white class, it is easy for us to look at how SCWAAMP affects our ideas of race. This video gives us an eye-opening portrayal of how SCWAAMP affects ideas of race for people of color. Kiri mentions that as a child, she knew she couldn't be a princess because princesses are white, not black. Relating to Christensen's essay, "Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us," it is not until just now that we have had a black Disney princess. It is easy to imagine that, as Christensen argues in her essay, the children in this video were affected by the "secret education." It forces us to be aware of how powerful the subliminal message is in teaching children the values of society. Clearly our society is still teaching children that being white is more valuable, and therefore more desirable, than being black.

Let's pull back the lens a bit, and get a larger view:



In his interview, Tim Wise coins the phrases racism 1.0 and racism 2.0. He defines racism 1.0 as "the sort of old school, overt kind of bias that people can realize when they see it." He warns that although our society is moving away from that type of bias, what we need to watch out for is racism 2.0, which he calls "enlightened exceptionalism." This allows people in the culture of power to hold onto their biases, and consider minority individuals that are intelligent, articulate, and successful to be exceptions to the norm. Wise states that "the proof of racial equity will be the day that people of color can be as mediocre as white folks and still get hired." This video is a great example of the role stereotypes play in racism 2.0 and of why we need to be critically aware. Although these people are concsiously aware of what stereotypes exist, they may be unconscious to the fact that they are accepting of some of those stereotypes, and because of that they are serving to keep SCWAAMP in its place.

Here are two examples of racism 2.0 in action:









In these videos, we see how people act on biases they might not even be aware that they have. Awareness is the key. Wise writes and speaks out on these issues to raise awareness. The first article we read by Johnson was specifically explicit about raising awareness to these kinds of issues, instead of just turning the other cheek, or sweeping it under the rug. When we use awareness to critically analyze the way things are, we can start to make things change for the better:

Argument for In The Service of What by Kahne and Westheimer

In this essay, Kahne and Westheimer discuss two different viewpoints on service learning: the charity view, and the change view. Those who support the charity viewpoint want to promote a sense of altruism in students by encouraging them to focus on the rewarding emotional experience of volunteerism. Those who support the change viewpoint want to encourage students to think critically about the socioeconomic state, how dominant ideology works to create inequalities, and how it might be reconstructed.

In one passage, the authors argue that while "almost all discussions of service learning practices emphasize the importance of reflection[,] for the most part . . . descriptions of reflective activities do not include the kind of critical analysis that might help students step outside dominant understandings to find new solutions. Clearly, having students share their thoughts and experiences with one another can be valuable, but reflective activities (commonly in the form of journal entries and discussions? may simply reinforce previously held beliefs and simplistic, if generous, conclusions . . . students may use their developing ability to articulate powerful logical arguments to 'maintain their most deep-seated prejudices and irrational habits of thought by making them appear more rational'" (p. 12).

This passage struck a chord in me as I remembered my experience this past summer as an Americorps VISTA. I was assigned to be an Arts Advocator/Literacty Coordinator for an urban community youth program. Going in I was very excited about what I could offer to the community, and what the experience would offer me. Each week we would be lead, by our service coordinator, in a superficial discussion of our week. What did we accomplish? What were our struggles? How could we do better?
At the end of my service term, I felt frustrated and disheartened. I felt I was unable to make any real, positive changes, I felt I was unsupported in trying to do so, and I felt prejudiced against the community I had been trying to serve. What shocked me about this passage was that it made me wonder about the method of our reflections. If we had had deeper, more critical discussions about the state of the community and the dominant ideology that was keeping it in that state, I might have had a different experience. If we had focused on restructuring dominant understandings, instead of applying bandaids, I might have felt better about my impact on the community.

Kahne and Westheimer, I believe, argue that while performing charitable acts is a positive experience for students, it is less valuable an experience without some critical reflection on the socioeconomic structures involved. Considering my own experience mentioned above, and the articles we've read and discussions we've had in class, I would have to agree with that argument. I feel it is due to the critical nature of this class that I am becoming a more open-minded, understanding individual. I feel this type of analysis is crucial to my future as an educator.

In my Intro to Lit Theory class, my professor is always pointing out the importance of critical thinking. Here are some youtube videos we watched recently which reinforce that notion. I think they somewhat relate to the argument of Kahne's and Westheimer's essay.

WARNING: this clip features explicit language

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hYIC0eZYEtI?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hYIC0eZYEtI?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zRNMZEDOBrM?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zRNMZEDOBrM?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

We have to think critically about everything, even Disney movies, as suggested in Linda Christensen's essay, "Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us."


I think it might be interesting, in class, if we could all share a story about a situation in which we feel some critical analysis might have bettered the experience.

Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community by Carlson (Extended Comments to Beckah's blog)

I am of a similar mind to Beckah. It is upsetting to realize what a huge issue there is surrounding homosexuality in our schools and communities. The two links she provided really accentuated the problem; the fact that young people are feeling compelled to commit suicide because they are being so victimized for being homosexual is, truly, awful. In both of the examples of this occurring, the bullying took place in a school. Beckah raises an important question, "if this had been going on for so long, how could a teacher not recognize it? They must have at least somewhat witnessed it since most of the bullying was at school. Do you think they were just “sweeping it under the rug” and ignoring it?"

I hope we all can agree, as prospective teachers, that the teachers should have been aware of what was going on, and done something to stop it. We are responsible for the well-being of our students, when they are in school, they are under our care. I believe raising awareness about homosexuality, in class, is a great way to start. Take for example, this article, which states that homosexuality is not an individual's "fault," or not something they choose, but rather it may be a genetic disposition. 

Teaching books relating to homosexuality, such as And Tango Makes Three by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson, or Am I Blue? Coming Out of the Silence, or any others listed under that link, is another good way to raise awareness, especially since literature puts the reader in touch with a character on such a personal, and emotional level. This also gives teachers a perfect opportunity to have discussions about homosexuality with their students.

If teachers can make students more open-minded about, and accepting of, homosexuality, I believe that will have to translate out into wider society. As those students pass on an open mind to their children, and so on and so forth. In class I would like to discuss this further, and also, what we can do to recognize bullying in school, and put a stop to it.

Connections on Collier, Rodriguez, and Delpit

In "Aria," Richard Rodrigues reflects on his experience as a second-language learner, Spanish being his first language, and English his second. It was a somewhat liberating, somewhat traumatic acquisition. While he gained confidence in American society, he lost confidence and a sense of comfort and closeness at home. He feels as if he had to sacrifice one identity for another.

Lisa Delpit notes in her essay, "The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children," that a "teacher cannot be the only expert in the classroom. To deny students their own expert knowledge is to disempower them." Delpit also conjectures that cultural diversity is important, it should be valued, and "each cultural group should have the right to maintain its own language style."

Virginia Collier says in her essay, "Teaching Multilingual Children," that a teacher must have a "true appreciation of the different linguistic and cultural values that students bring to the classroom," and she lists several guidelines for teachers of non-native English speakers to follow. Among them, number 2 recommends not correcting "so-called 'deficiencies' of . . . students," and number three directs not to "teach a second language in any way that challenges or seeks to eliminate the first language." She elaborates in guideline number 4 that a teacher must affirm native languages while teaching the second by having the class analyze and appreciate the differences and variety between languages and dialects. Guideline number 5 discusses code-switching, alternating between two languages, and the importance of it. She says, "code-switching by students should be accepted, and not penalized." They are recognizing and utilizing the strengths of both languages. Delpit says, in a similar sentiment, "I . . . do not believe that we should teach students to passively adopt an alternate code. They must be encouraged to understand the value of the code they already possess as well as to understand the power realities in this country . . . tell them that their language is unique and wonderful but that there is a political power game that is also being played." Both women seem to agree that in teaching multicultural classrooms, one must honor and embrace all of the different cultures while providing the necessary tools for students to thrive in standardized society. It is unacceptable for teachers to allow one culture to dominate and squash out the others.

Because the nuns teaching Rodriguez violated many of the guidelines and sentiments represented above, he feels he has lost much of his native identity, and was deprived of a rich family life. His experience is truly tragic, and I agree with the sentiments of Collier and Delpit. It is every teachers responsibility to make sure their students feel fully valued and appreciated, to ensure that experiences like Rodriguez's are few and far between, or better yet, eliminated altogether.

A website my aunt referred me to also stresses the importance of appreciating, celebrating, and managing differences, for all kinds of learners. I think it would be beneficial to discuss in class how some of the above strategies can translate to better success for other types of learners, not just second-language learners.

Response to Jonathan Kozol's "Amazing Grace" (Hyperlinks)

In "Amazing Grace," Jonathan Kozol shocks his reader with a brutally and shockingly honest view of poverty conditions in America. He focuses on the South Bronx, where an astonishingly high number of crack and heroine addicts satisfy their "needs" in the local park while their children play on the jungle gym; every child knows someone who either died of AIDS or is dying of it; in the winter it is so cold people go to bed hoping not to freeze to death in the night; children are frequently victims of homicide; illegal waste is dumped, and it is common for children to be depressed and anxiety ridden. It is difficult to read these things  and believe that they are occurring in America and not some other, third world country. It is difficult to read these things and not feel somewhat appalled, infuriated even. How could we, America, allow this? Surely there is something that can be done about it!

This was my reaction, and then . . . I think of dessert, yes! Dessert:

The things that we could do with just six Oreos, I believe, could at least lessen the severity of many of the issues Jonathan Kozol discusses in his essay.

For example, drugs are often seen, by people who are depressed, as a way to cope; they get high to stop the pain. If better health care can be provided for children, including mental health care and drug awareness, depression could be alleviated, and a child's risk for becoming an addict could be significantly reduced. Better health care could also be used to raise awareness on AIDS prevention. Some of that extra cookie, could be used to provide better, heated, insulated housing for poverty stricken communities, and I'm sure many more positive changes could be made with the help of a few billion extra dollars.

The pentagon is obese, hogging all the cookies, and everything else is being underfed. The pentagon can give up 6 out of 50 cookies for all the others to share. In fact, I daresay it could give up more. In conclusion, I would like to pose a question to the leaders of this "great nation:" WHERE'S YOUR COMMON SENSE?

Introductions

Hi, I'm Nessa!

Welcome to my blog!

First, let me say that I am an individual passionate about personal growth. I have a genuine love of learning and I continuously study and practice mindfulness. That I have the ability to choose my train of thought, and purposely direct my way of perceiving the world around me, has and continues to be the most liberating wisdom I could ever possess. I carry it with me at all times as it is a valuable tool in the most ultimate pursuit of all human beings: the pursuit of happiness.

It is my third year attending Rhode Island College for Secondary Education/English. I love it here. RIC, to me, is like the best kind of literary character; it's special because it's not extraordinary, because it's not without imperfections, because it functions under limitations. The experience I can have here is far more valuable to me than one I could have at an Ivy League school.

I have learned from some great professors here, and have great professors this semester. I have interesting classes, and the advantage of learning in a small classroom setting. RIC also understands and appreciates the working class student.

I have the highest confidence that RIC will help me achieve my dream of becoming an exceptional educator.

When I'm not pursuing this dream, I enjoy reading, listening to music: mainly jazz, folk, and classical, and spending time with loved ones. One of my more unusual hobbies is interior decorating.