Talking Points #7

"One More River to Cross"
Charles Lawerence

1."Segregation violates the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment not because there is no rational relationship between the classification and the purpose-it is a supremely rational system-but because its purpose is illegitimate."

2."Once it is understood that the injury results from the existence of the label of inferiority, it becomes clear that the cure must involve the removal of that label. The mere placement of black and white children in the same school does not remove the brand imprinted by years of segregation."

3."Perhaps the most detrimental effect of the court's refusal to acknowledge the true nature and scope of the institution of segregation has been the resulting failure of the judiciary, and ultimately the public at large, to recognize a constitutional right to the affirmative destruction of that institution."

Read more...

Talking Points #6

Jeannie Oakes
Tracking: Why Schools need to take another route

Oakes argues that by continuing to implement tracking in schools educators are not following in the right direction. The direction educators take must be altered to fit all students from all abilities. Through tracking education are creating uneven opportunities for students. Oakes states that tracking creates instructional advantages for high-ability students with better teachers, more expectations, and more resources and leaving the “unspecial” students low-ability and average students behind. Oakes suggests that higher ability students do equally well in mixed groups and that this might be the first way of changing or thinking about tracking. What’s actually working and what’s not? Oakes concludes her document by letting the readers know that unless teachers take the time to discuss, modify, change and develop alternatives to tracking will continue to be implemented in school system and will continue to create uneven opportunities and widen the gap between students.


1. “Students who need more time to learn appear to get less; those who have the most difficulty learning seem to have fewer of the best teachers.”

In this quote Oakes highlights that all students do learn differently and those who are of lower ability or average are getting deprived of resources and the same or better educators. The teachers of lower ability students have fewer expectations and continue to go over materials leaving it so that these children can never catch up or end up in the high ability group if they wanted to.


2. "Moreover, the nature of these differences suggests that students who are placed in high-ability groups have access to far richer schooling experiences than other students.”
I believe that this was one of Oakes main arguments, she states that higher ability groups are getting the better teachers, resources, more expectations and are being challenged. It’s not just the idea behind tracking that Oakes is stating it’s the instructional advantages that come along with classes that are made up of high-ability students.

3. “But unless teachers have the time and the autonomy to deliberate about, develop, and experiment with fundamental changes in school organization and classroom practices, alternatives to tracking are unlikely to be intelligently conceived, enthusiastically endorsed, or successfully implemented."

Oakes ends her argument with this quote, she explains that tracking will continue to exist and be implemented unless teachers are willing to take the time to change it. That since these ideas have been implemented for so long they are more likely to continue unless they are conversed about and modified into alternatives for students of all abilities.

I thought this article was very easy to read and follow. The article left me contemplating and thinking about the alternatives to tracking. Do any exist? Have they been implemented or suggested? Why aren't teachers and administrators taking the time to address this? I believe that just eliminating tracking won't neccesarily change the instructional advantages of higher ability students over others. In my old high school they eliminated higher level classes that were ranked by X,A,B,C all together and just made them college prep or standard. I don't believe this was the right strategy taken. It didn't change it I believe it actually made it worse for those that were in the high honor X classes. In some instances in high school there are some students who just want to pass and don't want to do any work and there are some who are high achieving who want to do the best they can to be on the top of the list in high school who worry about their grades and their gpa's. I feel as if low ability students sometimes do make an impact in high ability students achivements. Maybe in elementary and middle school this isn't the same aspect. At the same time I believe that those students who are low ability are capable of higher achiveing work. They do need more resources, better teachers who will push them to be higher achieving and have more expectation of them. They can do well they just need more time, and resources, not less.

Read more...

Talking Points # 5

In the Service of What?
The Politics of Service Learning
By: Joseph Kahne and Joel Westheimer

Kahne and Westheimer argue that service learning should be a part of the schools, and that the focus now seems to be on charity when it should be a focus toward change. The authors use real life experiences and thoughts of students, teachers and politicians to explain the view of service learning and the path it needs to take. Through these thoughts the reader is introduced to different opinions of service learning and the need for it. Some teachers and politicians believe that it is a part of a citizen’s duty to do community service. Unfortunately, this automatically puts service learning as a requirement making the students not have a choice; it’s something they have to do. By seeing service learning as an opportunity to better and change the lives of others will have a positive and more rewarding experience rather than if it was seen as an obligation or charity. The authors explain that this is the problem with service learning right now. By seeing it as a charity, for example in Mr. Johnson’s classroom the students weren’t asked to examine how the people they were helping ended up this way, what to do to prevent this from happening to someone else, and how can these students move toward making a positive change through service learning. Thus, if by doing service learning we are not changing nor attempting toward change, and making a difference then are we really making the effort to understand and better the community?

1. "We attempt to apprehend the reality of the other and then to struggle [for progress] together. In so doing we create opportunities for changing our understanding of the other and the context within which he or she lives."

I believe that the authors are trying to explain that to really make a change in the life of others we first need to comprehend those “others” lives. That one needs to understand others struggle to really help them. If we don’t understand how they got there, and what could have been changed or be changed about their daily life then how can we make it better? If we take the time to listen, and understand each other we are indeed “creating opportunities for change” not just a change in the lives of others but a change in our lives. How we think and perceive others. For example, the children who were introduced to the elementary school in the poor neighborhood had changed their perception of the urban school after attending. One of the students said I was scared to go because my mom said it was a bad neighborhood. However come to find out there students were extremely polite and surprisingly friendly. This proves that many people go by what they hear or see. We don’t take the time to really get to know people, and their struggle we automatically judge people whether it be a negative or positive judgment. Therefore, by taking the time to comprehend others and their surroundings, we are taking the time to address social concerns in a meaningful positive way.

2. “Educators who emphasize change would clearly also value the educational benefits of this approach. To tap into the full power of service activities, however, these practitioners would want to combine critical inquiry with action. This process can transform students' understandings of both disciplinary knowledge and the particular social issues with which they are engaged."

This quote brought out my attention because while teachers who believe that it should be a push toward change they also believe in the positive aspects these activities have in the classroom. These service activities would teach children how to learn, communicate and combine their thinking with action. It takes students out of the classroom and gives them a form of active learning in reality [the real world].


3. “The model is compassion or charity; [service is optional, a personal choice] and thus can never be the subject of political duties.”

This quote is evidence for the argument between charities versus change. In the article, Bush said that it should be the duty of every citizen to complete community service. I disagree, I believe that as part of communities would should give back and if everyone does so that is what keeps a strong community and government going. At the same time however by forcing students to do community service they are not getting positive feedback, learning experiences, or taking the time to understand others and their social issues. Therefore they are not really making a change. As the authors mentioned to make a change students must take the time to understand and comprehend others to want to do community service. If one doesn’t want to do something, or didn’t want to in the first place they aren’t going to have a positive attitude going into it. Therefore as the quote says it should be optional, and a personal choice and can never be a requirement. If it is it is automatically contributing to its meaning as a charity were giving but are we truly caring?

I thought this article was a extremely long and dense to read. I read it once and then had to read it over again there were some parts that were easy to understand and others where I was trying to figure out what they were trying to say and what their point was. Throughout most of the article, I wrote notes here and there and highlighted but once I had reached the end I wasn't sure if they were arguing for change, or for community service. As I went over it I came to a final argument and found evidence however I feel as if they are still arguging more than that? I found this article to be relating to my own experience in service learning. When we were first told we were being placed in an urban school I was a bit scared and wanted to request a school from home. However Martin Luther King Elementary is a wonderful school, with very intelligent children who are openminded to others and their classmates. I am very happy with my placement and I really hope I can move toward a positive change in the classroom.

Read more...

Talking Points #4

Unlearning the Myths that bind us: Linda Christensen

Christensen argues that through secret education such as the media, television shows, movies children are being taught and manipulated to think a certain way about themselves, people issues, sex, the world and race. These influences of secret education are teaching children that this is how the world should be and if that child is not like that they are automatically considered and outsider (others'). Thus, children believe that they need to dress and look a certain way to be considered normal or popular. This secret education manipulates the childrens thoughts, decisions, and actions. Therefore as a result children always think there is going to be a happy ending, that magic does exist, anything can come true, this education pulls children away from the real world(reality) and that life isn't always what we've planned or hope for.


1. “Many students don't want to believe that they have been manipulated by children's media or advertising. No one wants to admit that they've been "handled" by the media. They assure me that they make their own choices and the media has no power over them.”



2. "Happiness means getting a man and transformation from wretched conditions can be achieved through consumption in Cinderella's case, through new clothes and a new hairstyle."



3. “Because we can never look like Cinderella, we begin to hate ourselves. The Barbie syndrome starts as we begin a lifelong search for the perfect body. Crash diets, fat phobias, and an obsession with materialistic become commonplace.”

Read more...

Talking Points #3

Dennis Carlson: Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community

Carlson argues that as teachers we have to make sure that all voices get heard, not just from the dominant culture but from the people he refers to as “others” (blacks, working class, female, homosexuals) and that each is represented to our students. So that as a result gay students, teachers, those who have gay people in their family do not feel like they need to hide who they are, and their beliefs. Not only do “others” feel like if they do not hide them well enough they will lose everything they have worked hard for, and I feel as if we (the privileged norms) believe that their beliefs shouldn't be put out there, and that we need to do as much as we can to keep it out of the classroom by “normalizing” the school. However Carlson argues that the same we acknowledge that there issues such as race, culture, language barriers that are and taught in the classroom, so should the issue of gays.

1. “In 1993, for example, the gay rights movement claimed a major victory in the signing into law of a Minnesota bill that makes it illegal to discriminate against lesbians and gay men in employment and housing. Yet what got ignored in all the celebrating was a provision in the bill that prohibits teaching about homosexuality in the public schools.”
Unfortunately reading this is not a shock for me; I can truly believe that this happened. Most of us agree that it’s all fine, they can say what they’d like but as soon as it comes up in their child’s classroom, or they (mainstream/dominant/norms) find out a teacher/student/students parents is/are gay they automatically have a problem with it or something to say. It’s like that saying Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) many agree that gay people should have the same opportunities as the people in marriage however we have the as long as its not around us acceptance. The bill was definitely a “tap in the glass” like in SCWAMP but not a full achievement. I believe that only until we (the norms) accept that we are part of the problem nothing/others will never be fully accepted or discriminated in society. The video below is the best example of this acceptance in schools.





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 groups in the United States diagnosed with AIDS were male homosexuals.”

As I was reading this quote, I actually thought of a movie I had seen in health class about a gay teenager who was being picked on. I do remember this being the only class that ever talked about the issues and did relate it to AIDS. It portrays the people that are gay at a huge risk for AIDS and the cause of it at times. I don’t really know why or understand why it is being taught this way?

Sorry but this one really got to me I had to put it up ... It also relates to children automatically think that gays have diseases too... one of the little boys says one might have a disease then the other might get it too..




3. “We cannot and should not attempt to impose politically correct beliefs on students but 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.”

I believe this quote is the basis of his argument. It explains exactly what Carlson believe that as teachers we need to implement everyones voice in the classroom. Carlson believe that students and teachers need to feel and should feel comfortable with the gay community and people. Like Johnson says, "take the risk" talk about it....

Questions/Comments/Concerns: I honestly thought this was a little harder to follow than most of the texts we have read so far. I understood what he was saying but I couldn't follow his style of writing. However Carlson brought up alot of questions in my mind. For one, why was I also taught that gays were related to AIDS? I didn't know people(norms) worked so hard to keep the idea out of schools. I believe that Carlson has some great points and that only until people(norms) can give full acceptance to the gay issue than it will never be resolved or as others had said taken out from under the rug.

Read more...